• Fani Kokka, Andrew Bryant, Elly Brockbank, and Arjun Jeyarajah.
• Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St. Bartholomew's Hospital, Barts and The London NHS Trust, West Smithfield, London, UK, EC1A 7BE.
• Cochrane Db Syst Rev. 2014 May 29 (5): CD010870.

BackgroundCervical cancer is the second most common cancer among women up to 65 years of age and is the most frequent cause of death from gynaecological cancers worldwide. Women with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IA2 cervical cancer have measured stromal invasion (when the cancer breaks through the basement membrane of the epithelium) of greater than 3 mm and no greater than 5 mm in depth with a horizontal surface extension of no more than 7 mm. For stage IA2 disease, radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy or radiotherapy is the standard treatment. In order to avoid complications of more radical surgical methods, less invasive options, such as simple hysterectomy, simple trachelectomy or conisation, with or without pelvic lymphadenectomy, may be feasible for stage IA2 disease, considering the relative low risk of local or distant metastatic disease. The evidence for less radical tumour excision and for the role of systematic lymphadenectomy in stage IA2 cervical cancer is not clear.ObjectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of less radical surgery in stage IA2 cervical cancer.Search MethodsWe searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group trials register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE up to September 2013. We also searched registers of clinical trials and abstracts of scientific meetings.Selection CriteriaWe searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared surgical techniques in women with stage IA2 cervical cancer.Data Collection And AnalysisTwo review authors independently assessed whether potentially relevant studies met the inclusion criteria. We found no trials and, therefore, no data were analysed.Main ResultsThe search strategy identified 982 unique references, which were all excluded on the basis of title and abstract because it was clear that they did not meet the inclusion criteria. We identified one relevant large ongoing trial, so it is anticipated that we will be able to add this evidence to this review in the future.Authors' ConclusionsWe found no evidence to inform decisions about different surgical techniques in women with stage IA2 cervical cancer. In the future, the results of one large ongoing RCT should allow comparison of different types of surgery.

6 keywords...

hide…